IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v79y2012i1p30-46.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

U. S. energy production activity and innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Connelly, Michael C.
  • Sekhar, J.A.

Abstract

Life-cycle studies provide a comprehensive insight into comparative innovation behavior and innovation constants. In this article a comparison of the life-cycle plots for the production and patent activity is made for US energy production categories. As has been shown previously for material production [TFSC, vol.78, 2011], the two activities may be correlated to such an extent that they may be superimposed to a large degree, for all growth stage except stage IV, simply by an origin-shift. Over ten energy production methods have been studied in this manner for the first time. An origin-shift ratio, OR, (positive or negative lag) describes the amount required to shift the two activity curves in order to superimpose them. The relative drive-force ratio, DR (defined as the ratio of the production and patent growth constants) is noted to scale with the origin-shift. The value of this drive-force ratio determines the amount of production that is influenced by patents. The slope of curve of the drive-force ratio plotted against the origin-shift ratio is noted to be constant across all energy categories in the high growth Stage III. The authors find for the first time that even early stage production displays an origin-shift. Energy materials (i.e., those materials that dominate a particular type of energy production) are also studied in the material category alone, where the total usage of the material is considered. The concept of Green materials is discussed in this context. The life-cycle approach collapses the energy categories/sources and related materials into two groups. The authors discuss these groups in the Schumpeterian framework of constructive and destructive innovation. Group 1, containing coal, natural gas, wind, renewable, fossil fuel, solar and total energies, is composed of energy categories/sources whose patent activity could be inferred as driving their production. On the other hand, energy production from biomass, biofuel, geothermal and nuclear energies is identified in Group 2, in which the patent activity is driven by production (high innovation group). An (OR) of slightly less than one and a (DR) less than one, lead to a placement where with time, a constructive to destructive innovation transition is encountered A very low (OR) and a low (DR) on the other hand leads to a transition from Stage III growth to a no-growth (Stage IV) with time. Innovation enhanced resources and production are also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Connelly, Michael C. & Sekhar, J.A., 2012. "U. S. energy production activity and innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 30-46.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:79:y:2012:i:1:p:30-46
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2011.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162511001016
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.05.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "Resolving the impasse in American energy policy: The case for a transformational R&D strategy at the U.S. Department of Energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 346-361, February.
    2. Richard Jenner, 2004. "Real Wages, Business Cycles and New Production Patterns," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 441-452, November.
    3. Banales-Lopez, Santiago & Norberg-Bohm, Vicki, 2002. "Public policy for energy technology innovation: A historical analysis of fluidized bed combustion development in the USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(13), pages 1173-1180, October.
    4. Faiers, Adam & Neame, Charles & Cook, Matt, 2007. "The adoption of domestic solar-power systems: Do consumers assess product attributes in a stepwise process?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 3418-3423, June.
    5. Schmidt, Robert C. & Marschinski, Robert, 2009. "A model of technological breakthrough in the renewable energy sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 435-444, December.
    6. Li, Jun, 2009. "Scaling up concentrating solar thermal technology in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 2051-2060, October.
    7. Kobos, Peter H. & Erickson, Jon D. & Drennen, Thomas E., 2006. "Technological learning and renewable energy costs: implications for US renewable energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(13), pages 1645-1658, September.
    8. Wang, Tsung Juang & Liu, Shih Yuan, 2010. "Shaping and exploiting technological opportunities: The case of technology in Taiwan," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 360-367.
    9. Berry, David, 2009. "Innovation and the price of wind energy in the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4493-4499, November.
    10. Kelly-Yong, Tau Len & Lee, Keat Teong & Mohamed, Abdul Rahman & Bhatia, Subhash, 2007. "Potential of hydrogen from oil palm biomass as a source of renewable energy worldwide," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5692-5701, November.
    11. Harborne, Paul & Hendry, Chris, 2009. "Pathways to commercial wind power in the US, Europe and Japan: The role of demonstration projects and field trials in the innovation process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3580-3595, September.
    12. Simona O. Negro & Marko P. Hekkert, 2008. "Explaining the success of emerging technologies by innovation system functioning: the case of biomass digestion in Germany," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-08, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    13. Yerramilli, C. & Sekhar, J.A., 2006. "A common pattern in long-term metals production," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 27-36, March.
    14. Huang, Albert Ying-Je & Liu, Ruey-Hua, 2008. "Learning for supplying as a motive to be the early adopter of a new energy technology: A study on the adoption of stationary fuel cells," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 2143-2153, June.
    15. Bürer, Mary Jean & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2009. "Which renewable energy policy is a venture capitalist's best friend? Empirical evidence from a survey of international cleantech investors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 4997-5006, December.
    16. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    17. de Araújo, Maria Silvia Muylaert & de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos, 2008. "Acceptance of renewable energy innovation in Brazil--case study of wind energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 584-591, February.
    18. Roald A.A. Suurs & Marko P. Hekkert & Ruud E.H.M. Smits, 2009. "Understanding the build-up of a Technological Innovation System around Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 09-10, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Jun 2009.
    19. O Rourke, Fergal & Boyle, Fergal & Reynolds, Anthony, 2010. "Tidal energy update 2009," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 398-409, February.
    20. van der Laak, W.W.M. & Raven, R.P.J.M. & Verbong, G.P.J., 2007. "Strategic niche management for biofuels: Analysing past experiments for developing new biofuel policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 3213-3225, June.
    21. Faiers, Adam & Neame, Charles, 2006. "Consumer attitudes towards domestic solar power systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(14), pages 1797-1806, September.
    22. Wonglimpiyarat, Jarunee, 2010. "Technological change of the energy innovation system: From oil-based to bio-based energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 749-755, March.
    23. de Vries, Bert J.M. & van Vuuren, Detlef P. & Hoogwijk, Monique M., 2007. "Renewable energy sources: Their global potential for the first-half of the 21st century at a global level: An integrated approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2590-2610, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2016. "Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 97-112.
    2. Guseo, Renato & Mortarino, Cinzia & Darda, Md Abud, 2015. "Homogeneous and heterogeneous diffusion models: Algerian natural gas production," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 366-378.
    3. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2015. "Invention profiles and uneven growth in the field of emerging nano-energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 146-157.
    4. Na Liu & Jiancheng Guan, 2015. "Dynamic evolution of collaborative networks: evidence from nano-energy research in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 1895-1919, March.
    5. Kobos, Peter H. & Malczynski, Leonard A. & Walker, La Tonya N. & Borns, David J. & Klise, Geoffrey T., 2018. "Timing is everything: A technology transition framework for regulatory and market readiness levels," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 211-225.
    6. Krupa, Joseph S. & Rizzo, Donna M. & Eppstein, Margaret J. & Brad Lanute, D. & Gaalema, Diann E. & Lakkaraju, Kiran & Warrender, Christina E., 2014. "Analysis of a consumer survey on plug-in hybrid electric vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 14-31.
    7. Greco, Marco & Locatelli, Giorgio & Lisi, Stefano, 2017. "Open innovation in the power & energy sector: Bringing together government policies, companies’ interests, and academic essence," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 316-324.
    8. de Freitas, Luciano Charlita & Kaneko, Shinji, 2012. "Is there a causal relation between ethanol innovation and the market characteristics of fuels in Brazil?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 161-168.
    9. Liu, Na & Guan, JianCheng, 2016. "Policy and innovation: Nanoenergy technology in the USA and China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 220-232.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Kobos, Peter H. & Malczynski, Leonard A. & Walker, La Tonya N. & Borns, David J. & Klise, Geoffrey T., 2018. "Timing is everything: A technology transition framework for regulatory and market readiness levels," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 211-225.
    3. Negro, Simona O. & Alkemade, Floortje & Hekkert, Marko P., 2012. "Why does renewable energy diffuse so slowly? A review of innovation system problems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3836-3846.
    4. Bao, Qifang & Honda, Tomonori & El Ferik, Sami & Shaukat, Mian Mobeen & Yang, Maria C., 2017. "Understanding the role of visual appeal in consumer preference for residential solar panels," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1569-1579.
    5. Tsantopoulos, Georgios & Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Tampakis, Stilianos, 2014. "Public attitudes towards photovoltaic developments: Case study from Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 94-106.
    6. Briguglio, Marie & Formosa, Glenn, 2017. "When households go solar: Determinants of uptake of a Photovoltaic Scheme and policy insights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 154-162.
    7. Mostafaeipour, Ali, 2010. "Productivity and development issues of global wind turbine industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 1048-1058, April.
    8. Woersdorfer, Julia Sophie & Kaus, Wolfhard, 2011. "Will nonowners follow pioneer consumers in the adoption of solar thermal systems? Empirical evidence for northwestern Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2282-2291.
    9. Bello, S. & Reiner, 2024. "Experience Curves for Electrolysis Technologies," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2476, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Alam, Syed Shah & Nik Hashim, Nik Hazrul & Rashid, Mamunur & Omar, Nor Asiah & Ahsan, Nilufar & Ismail, Md Daud, 2014. "Small-scale households renewable energy usage intention: Theoretical development and empirical settings," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 255-263.
    11. Dosi, Giovanni & Grazzi, Marco & Mathew, Nanditha, 2017. "The cost-quantity relations and the diverse patterns of “learning by doing”: Evidence from India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1873-1886.
    12. Milad Mousavian, H. & Hamed Shakouri, G. & Mashayekhi, Ali-Naghi & Kazemi, Aliyeh, 2020. "Does the short-term boost of renewable energies guarantee their stable long-term growth? Assessment of the dynamics of feed-in tariff policy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 1252-1268.
    13. Hultman, Nathan E. & Pulver, Simone & Guimarães, Leticia & Deshmukh, Ranjit & Kane, Jennifer, 2012. "Carbon market risks and rewards: Firm perceptions of CDM investment decisions in Brazil and India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 90-102.
    14. Drury, Easan & Miller, Mackay & Macal, Charles M. & Graziano, Diane J. & Heimiller, Donna & Ozik, Jonathan & Perry IV, Thomas D., 2012. "The transformation of southern California's residential photovoltaics market through third-party ownership," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 681-690.
    15. Jacqueline Hettel Tidwell & Abraham Tidwell & Steffan Nelson & Marcus Hill, 2018. "SolarView: Georgia Solar Adoption in Context," Data, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Binz, Christian & Harris-Lovett, Sasha & Kiparsky, Michael & Sedlak, David L. & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The thorny road to technology legitimation — Institutional work for potable water reuse in California," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 249-263.
    17. Yunis Ali Ahmed & Ammar Rashid & Muhammad Mahboob Khurshid, 2022. "Investigating the Determinants of the Adoption of Solar Photovoltaic Systems—Citizen’s Perspectives of Two Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-25, September.
    18. Miremadi, I. & Saboohi, Y. & Arasti, M., 2019. "The influence of public R&D and knowledge spillovers on the development of renewable energy sources: The case of the Nordic countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 450-463.
    19. Laktuka, Krista & Pakere, Ieva & Kalnbalkite, Antra & Zlaugotne, Beate & Blumberga, Dagnija, 2023. "Renewable energy project implementation: Will the Baltic States catch up with the Nordic countries?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    20. Havas, Lisa & Ballweg, Julie & Penna, Chris & Race, Digby, 2015. "Power to change: Analysis of household participation in a renewable energy and energy efficiency programme in Central Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 325-333.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:79:y:2012:i:1:p:30-46. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.